�ric Dussault asked for opinions on this quote: >� Good engraving is almost always tight engraving. It may be tempting, when >you are getting paid per page (the method most publishers use) to space >music generously to create extra pages, but you should resist the urge. >Tighly spaced music is easier to read, as more information is readily >available for the eye (...) �
Of course this is a question whose answer depends on individual taste, and more importantly on institutional taste. To explain: For classical musicians, especially orchestral musicians, what he says is generally quite true. Just examine, for example, the string parts for a typical Breitkopf u. Haertel 19th century symphony. Up to a dozen measures on a line, but very clear and clean. Easy to read, and reduces page turns. Back in the 60s, when I was last involved with professional copyists (specifically Cameo Music in Hollywood) and studio musicians, I believe there was a union rule that 4 bars per line were required, and 10-line paper rather than 12-line. Or possibly that was just a standard for recording studio copying gigs. In any case, that's what you mostly saw, with the parts folded accordion style. Jazzers, in general, seem to prefer this. I find Hal Leonard publications very hard for these old eyes to read, not because of tight spacing but because the staves and notes are reduced and are too small for these old eyes to read comfortably. Some on this list feel that it is of overriding importance to fill each page, including the last page. That was never a consideration or a need for hand copyists. Good page turns are an ABSOLUTE NECESSITY!! Our summer musical this year is "Guys & Dolls." The copyist (with a lousy hand, but I'm getting used to it--horizontal quarter rests!) took great care in some cases, but there are still about 8 pages I'm going to have to photocopy and tape in because the page turns are not possible without dropping out. >What about people who just want their music to look good. By whose standards? Yours may not agree with the standards of those who will read your parts, or with a particular publisher. No question that this is an individual question of taste, but you also have to keep in mind who will be playing from your parts. >But the problem with Finale spacing is that it becomes uglier as >the music is becoming tighter. Am I silly or what? Finale's defaults (which I have complained about in the past and won't repeat) give VERY wide spacing, which I feel leaves much too much space unused and sets up poor page turns. And one piece we're playing on July 4th (added parts done by one of our band's arrangers using Finale) has really, really ugly dotted-8ths-16ths that are a challenge to translate while playing. There may, indeed, be a problem with the spacing algorithms. John John & Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
